Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
In this Discussion
11. Alternatives
Zoom today at 11
Caccia Bava, Silvio. 2012. “Short Circuits of Production and Consumption.” Inside a Champion.
Fontenelle Pacheco, Fabio Pierre. 2012. “A Brazil Unknown to Many Brazilians—Agroecology as a Solution to the Food, Ecological and Social Crises” Inside a Champion
Acosta, Alberto. 2012. “The Buen Vivir—An Opportunity to Imagine Another World.” Inside a Champion.
Rodriguez, Iokine and Mirna Lis Inturias. “Conflict transformation in indigenous peoples’ territories: doing environmental justice with a ‘decolonial turn’.” Development Studies Research 5(1): 90-105.
So we've spent a lot of time hearing from people battling polluters and corrupt governments, which is absolutely important, but fixing our environmental crisis is going to take more than that. We need imaginaries and practices to build a new kind of system in a new kind of world. Today's readings are both utopian, but also rooted in social imaginaries and practices that have been around for centuries. Our relationship with each other and the world around us hasn't always been the way economists claim it is, and even now there are ways we break from this as we build solidarity, community and new ways of living.
Given what you've read here, do you share the utopic practices outlined in the readings? How is your utopia the same or different? How do we reclaim these practices, re-establish them, strengthen them and cultivate them?
You only need to post twice today, but please don't let that hold you back from posting more!
Comments
Of all the readings, the Acosta article on Buen Vivir resonated with me the most. I found the shift of thinking about development from the current perspective in Latin America where "the poor must now pay to imitate the rich" to a Buen Vivir system that promotes a pluralist concept of development that is geographic-context-specific to be ingenious. The development model was imposed on Latin America and was created in a Eurocentric context that was never intended to take these countries to an equal development level as the 'developed countries' that created the model and still serve as the ideal. The disconnect between people and the Earth that is mended in Buen Vivir is utopic but foundational important in my opinion if we are to change how we interact with natural resources. My utopia would hold up those values as well as a biocentric vision that pairs with ecological justice and environmental justice to analyze the implications of environmental policy. I would also promote agroecology over agribusiness if it were up to me. The health benefits and promotion of biodiversity outweigh the possible economic losses, in my opinion. I think the most practical utopian approach is from Rodriguez and Inturias when talking about trying to impact structural power to make positive change. By reclaiming institutions that from our current political and economic models hold power, the resources they have can be turned towards a more egalitarian agenda. Then widespread, systematic change may be possible. The full dismantling of the green development model seems too unrealistic. I would stress media coverage of the benefits of agroecological farming practices, the increased publication and distribution of studies on decolonial efforts, and the cooperative nature of Buen Vivir as a strengthening method. I think that if people knew these alternatives existed to our current relationship with the environment, they would advocate for change.
It's hard for me to imagine a completely different way of life, but something that I really like and potentially could see being implemented has a lot to do with this idea of short circuits, specifically food production/consumption. A world in which the average person is eating food from all over the world is obviously not ideal, and certainly not sustainable. I believe there is a way, however to grow all kinds of foods almost anywhere, close to where it will be consumed. First off, if one has access to do so, they can certainly have a greenhouse where a number of plants and vegetables can grow. A lot of a family's food supply could come from this. Additionally, and many people don't realize, it is pretty cheap and easy to build and maintain a chicken coop, so if people want meat and eggs, its very easy to get it extremely locally. To supplement this, or for those who do not have access to land, urban farms can exist. There already exist hyper efficient urban, indoor farms that have the capability to produce a lot. Ideally, each town could have a number of these in which all produce which does not grow in the region could have access too. I think a big step towards my ideal world would be to source food locally and cheaply.
I agree that it is feasible to source your own food locally and ideal to support local businesses and put money back into your community. One critique I have of short-circuits is that they are becoming increasingly monetized by big businesses in the name of 'organic'. Organic and local food is healthier for you and more sustainable but I am hesitant when companies like Whole Foods sell these items and jack up the price tag. They have the consumer base to do this and make a profit whereas farmers who are also growing organic food do not and may not get as much money for their crops. I think community efforts can help combat this which promotion of farmers' markets. We read an interesting article in my Anthropological Theory class about the connections made through food trade and how they serve as social capital to strengthen bonds. If I can find it I will post it up here.
This was my ideology too, I don't really see large social change happening but I do think that short circuits are more possible. I think the shift would take awhile. Eating local foods is trendy and I've noticed that certain places do it a lot more than others. Where I'm from at least half of the restaurants source their food locally. There is also a store called Local full of local produce, meats, baked goods, and cheeses that has had to move locations 3 times to expand. The farmers markets are also really popular. Thinking about Colorado Springs I've seen way less of this which makes sense because produce is harder to grow here. I agree that if people have the means they should have a greenhouse or chickens, but I also think community/urban gardens would be beneficial and places like CC can do better at sourcing food and other goods locally.
I really like what you're saying about locally sourced foods and different ideas to make it feasible for people and I think you make some great points. My family has owned chickens for probably ten years at this point and they are a great food source and don't take much money, land or time to maintain. But I do think gardening and growing ones own food is far more time consuming and labor intensive. I have been working a lot since quarantine in my garden and starting seeds for vegetables later in the summer. Although I really enjoy this it's not something I would normally be able to maintain while working or in school full time. I liked your idea of having community gardens/ greenhouses. It could be a group of peoples job to maintain and therefore the food is local and everyone has access to it. The issue I think still remains the incentive to make a radical changes like this. We are used to the convenience of the grocery store and being removed from where our food comes from. I am not sure how we would make large scale changes like this in our society but I do think it's more quickly feasible in smaller communities.
For anyone that's interested watch this, its about vertical urban farming. The video outlines a bunch of benefits with this method. I think this could be a viable solution in the future. In a lot of cases this can be cheaper than farms elsewhere in the world that have to deal with a number of factors like blight, transportation, and low crop yields. Pretty much my vision is having as many of these as necessary for a city to be self-sufficient on them (as far as produce goes). The main issue with these is energy, of which it requires a good amount to operate. I think solar is a good option, and in other areas, other renewable sources like wind could also be great. Anyway check that out, they seam really cool.
@a_hipp I think organic and local food can be both environmnetally and socially irresponsible, which it makes me doubt the short circuits being efficient when linked tot he current system. Apart from the issue you rised, I think it was in the Argentianian chapter about soy that they explored how regulations for food production are complex and what it means by sustianable is not always the best for the land or the consumer. When producing organic food, other strong inputs can be added such as sulfur, and the working environment is not always considered. There were some cases regarding pineapple in Costa Rica which were considered organic and had horrible working conditions. If we are still in this fast-growing consumption minset, which to an extent also bought environmentalism, I find it really hard to trust local food blindly. When reading the chapter on Agroecology, it made me think that if we want to produce locally, we maybe need to think of agricultural practices that are rooted in different systems and social conditions. More solidarity and empaty will be needed, and to change that there is more needed than only the location of the food.
That said, and to answer to @SpencerFier, I find short circuits a step forward and not the final destination. I know I said this already in the Zoom and I do not want to repeat myself, but a lot of questions come when I think of this possible solutions. Who is going to take care of the garden? because it does require time, and again, usually this falls into POCs or women's shoulders. Where are we going to get those solar pannels and wind turbines from? That is also a lot of contamination in the industrialization, shipping, and waste. Also, to try to grow "all kinds of foods almost anywhere" can really not be productive nor sustainable. I believe that every community has its own realities and not everyone can gro food for themselves because of a number of reasons. This does not mean that I do not believe that local is the way to go. I think it is, but that for that to be really sustainable and socially responsible we need to address many other issues of this system first. Gender, race, and economic inequality are the first ones tht come to my mind, but there are many more.
I agree that the organic label and such has downfalls. Additionally, the jack up of prices and use of those specific consumer bases is not fair and oftentimes accessible to those only able to pay high prices. That being said, in the ideal situation where local food and short circuits become such a huge part of the food industry, the accessibility should increase and price points go down. I believe that the localization of food would also help the issue of farmers not being compensated enough.
We looked into vertical farming in high school and I am a really big supporter of it. To me, it also seems like a realistic and logical future. While energy is one of the biggest drawbacks from it, with renewable energy technology increasing, I think it is an easily solvable issue. While the creation of more and more technology and "development" can have big potential issues, I do not think we can blindly write out development of new technology. Technology has been used ever since primates first found fire, and I believe it has some very high potentials to do great and move humanity forward.
I think it's important to acknowledge your point about gardens and who will maintain them. It's absolutely an issue and realistic that even in years when these concepts would likely be in place, POC and women would still unproportionally maintain these. However, I don't know if I agree that other issues should be addressed "first." I don't think we can afford to wait for change in other social issues. It does need to continue to be acknowledged and mentioned in conversations about local farming systems. Thanks for bringing it up.
I liked reading about the short circuit system which emphasized localism. The first thing that came to mind was food. Other than some supplementing here and there, I think localism in foodways is an achievable system. However, the globalization of our food system has pervaded into every aspect of harvesting, processing, and distribution. I think about outsourced seafood products because of the value of coastal real estate. Many of the fish processing places have been displaced my private homes. Globalization has allowed us to break through the constraints of seasonality, population fluctuation, species, etc in most of our food products and people will have to learn to live without seemingly unending resources. Ultimately, people need to relearn about the enviroments in which they live. For example, xeriscaping instead of bright green lawns in LA. A reconnection between people and the direct world they occupy is a good starting point but I do think it will take more drastic change than just that.
I also really like the idea of a collective garden/green house. People are disconnected from the food they eat and disconnected from their neighbors. The sense of community and local food a collective garden would produce could not only feed the people who are part of it but also provide a community bound together by some degree of sell sufficiency and collective ownership. I think those are two powerful lessons because our current makeup is characterized more by specialization and privatization.
I will say, I think something like localizing food sources will have a much greater impact on people than just where they get there food from. I agree, that people relearning about the environment, and especially that which they live, is very important. I do think short circuit systems will help with this a lot, as I believe it will change mindsets and priorities. We have read a lot about needing to restructure quite a bit in America to make environmental justice occur. I believe that something as localizing food will require and encourage many smaller phycological changes in the American people, and help this.
I believe environmental movements mean nothing if they are not regarding environmental justice and inequlity. Might just be a disagreement we have, but if these issues are not addressed we will (and kind of are at this point) end up embracing ecofascist ideas where we might be glad for environmental movements even if it means the life of others we (as privilieged people) can ignore. Are californians going to feel better about eating local strawberries even if there are being picked by undocumented immigrants in explotative conditions from which many die? Am I going to feel better for consuming locally even if that production is creating ANOTHER burden in this patriarchal system in a woman's shoulders? I do not think we can separete environmental and social issues, I think there are many ways in which solutions can be benefitial for both, the environmental and societal aspect. But to just "go local" does not prove to be enough for that.
I really loved the Buen Vivir article. I think given the state of the world today, it can be hard to imagine the future you want, like people were saying in class, it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism. But there's something really important about the practice of conceptualizing a framework totally outside what we have now. Even if the goal feels unreachable, working towards it can still make things more livable than they are now. I think something I appreciated about the Buen Vivir article was how it articulated an ability to deconstruct what already exists. Buen Vivir actually imagines un-doing colonialism and not in the metaphoric, inclusionary ways, but in actually divesting from the economic systems and the relational values that dominate the world today.
The short circuit article seemed a little more like it works with the confines of the basic framework of society today, but the prospect still seemed exciting to some degree. I appreciate how embedded in short circuit systems seems like more of a focus on community reliance, rather than isolation.
No I agree actually. I think I misunderstood a little bit but you're totally right. You cannot differentiate between environmental justice and environmentalism/sustainability. It's actually really interesting to me, I was talking to a friend yesterday who is an EV major about the carbon credit system. He hadn't really heard about all the human rights violations and injustices that it creates. It just made me think about how anthropology is the study of people and its a really cool, specific way of addressing environmentalism. That being said, it surprised me to think about how not everyone would address something as carbon credits through this lens- meaning my friend had just learned about it through the scientific lens of what the program does. Maybe thats a really obvious point but it really made me think. We talked about how much CC has probably invested in offset programs to be able to be 100% carbon neutral. I don't know, but I would certainly imagine some of those projects are similar to those we've been reading about.
@charlotte Your citing of the idea that it's easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism really resonated with me. I agree that it's really important to conceptualize different ways of living and, like the GND envisions, not just solve the climate crisis but do so in a way that rights many of the injustices of our current society. Alternative utopias are obviously the goal that should be strived for, however, I think its also really important to make ourselves conceptualize distopias as well, specifically if we continue with business as usual. If we fail to act for too long, we could see billions of people die and much of the life as we know it end. Like many say, the Earth will be fine, "saving the planet" is about saving ourselves. Thus, when I consider alternatives, I must admit I think about them in a decidedly darker way. I consider alternatives to that worst-case scenario fate. Of course utopias are on that spectrum and are the only kind of alternatives we should be considering now while we still have time to act. However, if action is stalled for multiple decades longer, we will have to expand our conceptualization of alternatives to picking between taking ourselves back to the dark ages and being taken back to the stone age. Business as usual must end one way or another. I sincerely hope that we are able to progress away from it, but in the coming decades as we further run out of time we must incorporate into the concept of alternatives that most anything, in the end, will be better than the status quo.
While I'm not overly techno-optimistic, I agree that more energy intensive solutions (like desalination and carbon capture in addition to vertical farming) are very viable solutions even though energy consumption is currently such a big part of the problem. My previous post was very pessimistic, but only insofar as to consider all possible manifestations of the future. On the other end of that, I very much disagree with @joshua that wildly futuristic energy sources like fusion are science fiction and not something we should base our hopes on. Certainly, we should not count on them and try to reduce energy consumption as long as it is harmful, but I think Stephan was absolutely correct in pointing out that in the past other technologies that we use now were considered just as outlandish. Furthermore, from what the little I've seen and read, fusion has actually been achieved, and has gotten a lot closer to the viability threshold (of producing more energy than it consumes) over the past decades. All that to say that nothing should be considered off the table as we imagine a radically different future.
It's interesting what you're saying as local food becoming trendy. I also feel like short circuits could be feasible options but I feel like once it's popular the aura of it kind of fades. That's not a negative, just something I'm thinking about. Right now, making consumer choices that seem sustainable can give people some kind of social capital. It's not really about people actually being connected but about the feeling of affirmation after making what feels like an ethical choice. The way in which local food is experiencing its trend makes me feel like a) people aren't really grasping the nuance that just because food is produced locally, it doesn't inherently make it more sustainable than every other choice there's other factors there and b) the local food craze could just be a trend and not necessarily a permanent part of people's consumption patterns unless there's some pressure for actual change.
I agree with your point about Buen Vivir and the benefit of imagining a society completely different from what we know. Without considering these ideas we won't be able to as clearly identify the issues and things we could change within in our communities. I think the concept of short circuits is something that seems more feasible after considering some of the more drastic ideas which is beneficial. Once we view those ideas as feasible we can actually make plans to implement them.
I don't know a ton about fusion and where its development is, but I think that writing off anything, whether your right or wrong, isn't necessary. So long as all resources aren't going solely into it, which I think goes along with anything (even proven solutions such as wind or solar power), theres no reason not to explore all options. Along the lines of energy consumption for vertical housing, I do think it is very solvable. With what Josh was talking about with little wind turbines on roofs and solar panels, it doesn't seem like a matter of is it possible, more so just when will it happen. Even if fusion doesn't end up working out or at-least in the foreseeable future, we have other options and I'm not concerned about having the technology for renewable energy not.
I'm pretty pessimistic when it comes to the environment and the future and I really don't see major change happening any time soon. I used to believe that once greenhouse gas emissions and deforestation reached a certain point people would have to stop emissions. I now realize this is unrealistic, there won't be a point that makes oil companies stop drilling. I also used to think that technological advancements would come about that drastically reduces carbon emissions and any environmental harm but I don't really believe in that anymore.
I think that imagining utopias, our own visions for the future, is really powerful and helps to maintain motivation, and simply optimism that there is another way for our world to function. Reminding myself of how much the world has changed in the last hundred years always helps to maintain my hope for a future similar to that which the GND or other wide scale political movements envisions. For those reasons I also loved the Buen Vivir article, any great change must start with understanding that another system can function, one divested from capitalism and the structures that came from colonial sentiments. Then working to reach that point feels all the more invigorating through each battle. I agree with @Julieta that no change to environmental action can come without a large emphasis on justice. Reforming every aspect of our system is essential, guaranteeing universal health care, affordable housing, quality public education, and divestment from the fossil fuel industry. A world consisting of millions of quality, well paying, green jobs is so exciting to me, accessible to everyone. And this new green industry can power the types of projects discussed earlier in the thread, such as vertical farming and all of the sustainable energy initiatives needed to power such endeavors.
I also really love this idea, and believe it has a really wonderful space in a greener future. However, there are many communities who still do not have access to clean soil due to the toxic legacy of factories or energy plants. If local gardens become a form of self sustaining communities ensuring that all areas have equal access to space for these gardens is essential. Otherwise initiatives like this can quickly turn into trendy wealthy neighborhoods cultivating their own food, while marginalized communities are unable to do so for risk of lead poisoning.